MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN HONG KONG
Cross-border evidence gathering and asset recovery under Cap. 525
In the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, international cooperation concerning asset restraint, confiscation and cross-border evidence gathering is governed principally by the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Ordinance (Cap. 525).
Under this framework, a place outside Hong Kong may request assistance in restraining property that could satisfy an external confiscation order, registering and enforcing a qualifying external confiscation order, or obtaining evidence and other assistance in a criminal matter. Requests are processed through the Mutual Legal Assistance Unit of the Department of Justice.
CHRONOLOGICAL UPDATE AND AGREEMENT STATUS
Hong Kong's current MLA network
The official Department of Justice list, updated to 2 June 2026, records the following position.
Operative agreements
Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mongolia, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland and UkraineThe Department of Justice currently lists 21 bilateral MLA agreements in force.
Suspended agreements
Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United StatesThese agreements remain listed, but their operation is recorded as suspended.
Signed but not yet in force
Argentina, Kazakhstan, Russia, Viet Nam and ZambiaThese agreements have been signed but are not currently operative.
STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND APPLICATION
The legal mechanics under Cap. 525
Each request must satisfy the Ordinance and any applicable bilateral agreement or subsidiary order.
External confiscation order
An order made under the law of a place outside Hong Kong to recover specified rewards, derived property, instrumental property or a pecuniary advantage connected with an external serious offence.
Cap. 525 permits qualifying foreign confiscation orders to be registered and enforced in Hong Kong, even where the foreign proceedings are civil in form or directed against property.
Dual criminality requirement
The Secretary for Justice must not comply unless the relevant conduct would also have constituted an offence had it occurred in Hong Kong, subject to the Ordinance and any applicable arrangement.
Assistance may be refused where the underlying foreign conduct does not correspond to a Hong Kong criminal offence.
Political and discriminatory bars
Assistance must be refused where substantial grounds establish a prohibited political or discriminatory purpose, including prejudice based on race, religion, nationality or political opinions.
The statutory screening process protects against misuse of MLA procedures for political persecution or discriminatory treatment.
Protection of third-party rights
Persons asserting an interest in restrained property may seek relief in the Court of First Instance and may be heard in proceedings concerning registration or enforcement.
An innocent owner, business partner or other legitimate claimant may apply to vary or discharge an order insofar as it affects their property.
ASSET RESTRAINT PROCEDURE AND DEFENCE STRATEGY
From foreign request to judicial restraint
Executive screening is followed by an application to the Court of First Instance. An affected person may then seek appropriate relief from the Court.
Executive screening and application
A foreign authority sends its request to the Secretary for Justice as Hong Kong's Central Authority. If the statutory requirements are met, the Secretary for Justice may apply without prior notice to the Court of First Instance for a restraint order.
Restraint and service
The court may prohibit dealing with specified realisable property. Once the order is served, affected persons and institutions must comply with its terms; the precise scope depends on the wording of the order.
Challenge dual criminality
The affected person may contend that the conduct relied upon would not constitute a Hong Kong offence or that another statutory precondition has not been satisfied.
Living and legal expenses
An application may be made to vary the order to permit reasonable living or legal expenses, subject to the statutory scheme and the Court's discretion.
Protect third-party property
A person claiming a legitimate interest may identify property that does not belong beneficially to the target or is not properly within the order's scope.
Delay and procedural fairness
Depending on the facts, the Court may be asked to vary or discharge an order because foreign proceedings have not progressed, statutory conditions are no longer met, or material information was not fairly presented on the original application.
HOW MCS CAN ASSIST
Responding to cross-border asset restraint
MCS can review the foreign request and Hong Kong restraint order, assess whether the statutory requirements and dual criminality principle are satisfied, and advise affected individuals, companies and innocent third parties. We can apply to vary or discharge an order, seek provision for reasonable living and legal expenses, protect property outside the proper scope of the request and coordinate the Hong Kong response with overseas counsel.